Link

There's more, but I had to chuckle at the last paragraph above. AP is part of a media that's being edged out by the new media. Bloggers are a part of that now. They couldn't just let bloggers get away with being actual news sources could they?

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

That last paragraph comprised of three sentences. Did any of them strike you as being innaccurate?

It is widely regarded, even on anonymous internet forums, as `bad form` if one`s argument is so weak that one is reduced to relying on blogs for validation. To see a President do the same is just....

__________________
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
Marx (G.)

I blog, and I wouldn't consider me a credible news source. But that's mostly because I tend to comment on the news, not do original reporting.

Some blogs would count as news sources -- as in, they do original reporting -- but the question is whether you can trust them. As far as Iraqi blogs in particular, I think it would be foolish to take any one of them as gospel. Maybe if you read a couple of dozen, from across the spectrum, you might start getting a feel for what life in Iraq is like.

__________________
Man up.

Bloggers are not credible news sources.
Drudge constantly has incorrect information, I believe he said it is around 20%.
That blogger site a few days ago that reported Edwards was stepping out of the race is another example.

These are both very credible sites and they constantly post out right lies, unintentionally.

I think the whole "new media" is just a conservative pipe dream. What they really mean is " a media that reports news I agree with".

Ixtellor

meehh.. a couple of times bloggers have come up with a good lead. Such as the pervert republican congressslime and DanRather's aborted swiftboating.



---

As for a President of the United States quoting a blogger during a public speech on major US policy... Laughably amateurish. GWB really does need better speech writers.

After dicknbush spent gagillions building the federal Dept of Homeland Security, you'd think junior would have better people to quote and listen to.

__________________
.




"When I'm in command, every mission is a suicide mission!" -Capt. Zapp Branigan
The United Church of the Latter Day Tangential Tarts

What gives a "journalist" more credibility than a blogger? Nothing I can see. If anything, the blogger would be more interested in telling his own point of view, while the journalist is most interested in selling his story. If you're talking about day-to-day life in Iraq, one is just as good as the other. Either one may have a different perspective or make the whole thing up out of their imagination.

Personally, I like the soldier's blogs. They're verifiable, and they give a tiny slice of the big picture.

__________________
Order without liberty and liberty without order are equally destructive. - Theodore Roosevelt

yah 12th, but again.. the POTUS quoting bloggers and journalists during major policy speech is a bit amatuerish. Whats next, dubya's gonna be wearing pinstripeed suit with cowboots on?



One thing Obamamalamadingdon's presidential candidacy got going for it is we know Barack is good at writing his own stuff and quick on the draw with a verbal retort. Thats a plus for his candidacy in my book.

__________________
.




"When I'm in command, every mission is a suicide mission!" -Capt. Zapp Branigan
The United Church of the Latter Day Tangential Tarts

A journalist has (or should have) a professional ethic of independence and truthfulness. If a journalist posts enough lies or inaccuracies they may lose their job.

None of this holds for bloggers.

__________________
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
Marx (G.)

That's the thing. Bloggers are good at telling their points of view. They do not even make lousy attempts at being objective. They have full autonomy and no accountability. While the news is subject to the critique of bloggers and other news sources, bloggers are large in number, small in following, and are never critiqued UNLESS they end up on the news. There is no system for checking the accuracy of bloggers and they are not high-profile enough to demand any such checks.

But it is a moot point. The main problem with using "upbeat bloggers" as a source is that it is kind of like saying "A few guys I met said things are doing great." Chances are that there are gloomy bloggers to cancel out any upbeat ones... and maybe even a few that try to be objective. To cite a couple bloggers is essentially the same thing as citing a couple kids off the street... and likely ignoring the one that doesn't give the answer you want.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

It depends on what he is saying. The experiences and opinions of those who live there should be welcome. IMO, it's just as reliable as journalists opinions esp. when the journalists likely don't know what it was like there before.

Now don't pretend that you believe journalists never do that.

__________________
Order without liberty and liberty without order are equally destructive. - Theodore Roosevelt